It seems like there's a majority consensus of those engaged. No need for a vote, but I think the question about notifications should be addressed first.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 13:47 Christopher Shannon < christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm +1 to using some kind of wiki so if we can't use Confluence then GH > sounds fine to me. Do we need to take a formal vote for using the Github > wiki or is there enough consensus already? > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 1:43 PM Daniel Roberts <ddani...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 for the GH wiki with major discussions still being fed into, or > > originated on the mailing lists. > > > > As a side question, if there is a lengthy discussion on a GH issue, is it > > standard practice to just recap that in a mailing list message? > > Or is there a more "formal" inclusion process to follow? > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 1:39 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I don't think the workflow I proposed about using PRs and discussion on > > > tickets, etc. and the accompanying arguments about keeping things > > > consolidated and accessible to potential contributors not participating > > on > > > GitHub, were really challenged at all. However, since I seem to be the > > only > > > one advocating for using the website, to keep things centralized, as > per > > > previous attempts to consolidate documentation, I won't fight the use > of > > > GitHub wiki. But I do want to make it clear that we're proceeding in > that > > > direction under my objection (-0), and that I'm not convinced this is > the > > > best path forward. Hopefully, I will be proven wrong in time. > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023, 11:58 Dave Marion <dmario...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > At this point, I think we should move forward with a GH wiki and > then > > > we > > > > can re-evaluate things once the Apache confluence issue is sorted > out. > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 11:57 AM dev1 <d...@etcoleman.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I just tried (Wed, 3/15) and still received the same error. I > asked > > on > > > > > the infra slack channel and they replied that they are still > working > > to > > > > > determine what the issue is - signs are pointing to something > inside > > of > > > > > confluence, but no progress. > > > > > > > > > > At this point, I think we should move forward with a GH wiki and > then > > > we > > > > > can re-evaluate things once the Apache confluence issue is sorted > > out. > > > > > > > > > > Ed Coleman > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Dave Marion <dmario...@gmail.com> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 11:09 AM > > > > > To: dev@accumulo.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml? > > > > > > > > > > Looking at the Infra slack channel response, one of the responses > in > > > the > > > > > channel said that "it's some sort of db corruption according to > > > > Atlassian". > > > > > Doesn't sound good.... > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 10:55 AM Dave Marion <dmario...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-24291 is still > > > unresolved > > > > > > and the only comment on the ticket is one that Ed added two days > > ago > > > > > > requesting an ACCUMULO wiki space. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 12:26 PM dev1 <d...@etcoleman.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> I do not see any comments in the infa slack channel - so no > > updates > > > > > >> for now. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> From: Dave Marion <dmario...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 12:06 PM > > > > > >> To: dev@accumulo.apache.org > > > > > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Right, I was just curious if there was any follow-up as I think > Ed > > > > > >> said that it was going to be discussed by the INFRA team > > yesterday. > > > > > >> There is at least one other recent ticket ( > > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-24216) where > > selfserve > > > > > >> had an issue and the INFRA team created the space manually. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 11:57 AM Christopher < > ctubb...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > You can track that issue at > > > > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-24291 > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 10:31 AM Dave Marion < > > dmario...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Ed, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Any update from INFRA on being able to create confluence > > > pages? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 4:07 PM Christopher < > > ctubb...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > We've definitely used the website for more than that. We > use > > > it > > > > > >> > > > to document things for users, help developers know how to > > > > > >> > > > contribute, store drafts of designs, share user stories > via > > > > > >> > > > blogs, do release announcements, and more. There's > > definitely > > > > > >> > > > space on the website to do this kind of thing, if we want > > to. > > > > > >> > > > We've used it that way before. If you only see it as a > place > > > > > >> > > > "for user consumption after everything has been > finalized", > > > > > >> > > > then you're missing out on the other ways we currently use > > the > > > > > >> > > > site, and the ways we've used it in > > > > > >> the past. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > With the website, most of the collaboration would happen > in > > > the > > > > > >> > > > GH issues about proposed designs or changes to designs, > just > > > > > >> > > > like we do today with code or other documentation, which > > > > > >> > > > everybody is used to. I agree it's not as good as Google > > Docs > > > > > >> > > > for on-the-fly comments/annotations, but I don't think > > > > > >> > > > Confluence or Wiki are as good as that either, and Google > > Docs > > > > > isn't really an option... > > > > > >> > > > unless you just want to link to it in the mailing list and > > > > > >> > > > stick to Google Docs from your personal Google account, > > until > > > > > >> > > > it's ready for publication, which would also be fine (any > > > > > >> > > > interested persons can simply request write access by > > replying > > > > > >> > > > to the message where > > > > > >> you shared the link).. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > We are a much smaller project than many others, and we > have > > > > > >> > > > previously suffered from having stuff too spread out. Even > > if > > > > > >> > > > other projects find a separate space valuable for them, > I'm > > > not > > > > > >> > > > sure it's best for the Accumulo project. While I think > it's > > > > > >> > > > useful to examine what other projects do, I do think we > > should > > > > > >> > > > be careful to adopt anything just because others find it > > > > > convenient for them. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Confluence is my second choice, but with a big gap between > > it > > > > > >> > > > and my first choice. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > On a personal note: I hate using Confluence, because I > think > > > > > >> > > > the navigation is highly unintuitive, as is the > permissions > > > > > >> > > > model, and I don't like the idea of learning yet another > > > > > >> > > > wiki-syntax (though I've read Confluence supports some > > limited > > > > > >> > > > Markdown, but probably not the same as GitHub/Jekyll). I > > also > > > > > >> > > > do not want to set up custom notifications for watching > yet > > > > > >> > > > another space. If we use Confluence, I will probably > > > contribute > > > > > >> > > > very infrequently there because of my frustrations with > > having > > > > > >> > > > used it before. However, that would be my choice, and > should > > > > > >> > > > not be a reason the project chooses one over another. I'm > > > > > >> > > > sharing my personal opinion only because it is influencing > > my > > > > > >> > > > opinion about the website being more accessible, via our > > > > > >> > > > current GitHub PR/issue/Markdown workflows, and I wonder > how > > > > > >> > > > many other potential contributors would feel similarly. > It's > > > > > >> > > > hard to know, since it seems like a lot of this is > > subjective, > > > > > >> > > > and is going to come down to a consensus of personal > > > > > >> preferences. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 3:46 PM Dave Marion > > > > > >> > > > <dmario...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > I don't see the website as an area where we would have > > > > > >> > > > > collaborative discussions about an idea. For example, > > making > > > > > >> > > > > comments and > > > > > >> > suggestions > > > > > >> > > > on > > > > > >> > > > > a document like you can do in Google Docs. I see the > > website > > > > > >> > > > > as a > > > > > >> > place > > > > > >> > > > > where items are documented for user consumption after > > > > > >> > > > > everything has > > > > > >> > been > > > > > >> > > > > finalized. I'm not trying to create a private discussion > > > > > >> > > > > area, I > > > > > >> > think > > > > > >> > > > > anyone can see the wiki (but I think anonymous comments > > are > > > > > >> > > > > disabled > > > > > >> > due > > > > > >> > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > spam issues). I see no issue with putting > work-in-progress > > > > > >> > > > > documents > > > > > >> > on a > > > > > >> > > > > wiki and referencing them via emails to the dev list. I > > > think > > > > > >> > > > > this is > > > > > >> > > > done > > > > > >> > > > > in a lot of other projects. Non-committers that don't > have > > > > > >> > > > > access to > > > > > >> > the > > > > > >> > > > > wiki and want to make comments, suggestions, and ask > > > > > >> > > > > questions can > > > > > >> > do so > > > > > >> > > > > via the mailing list. I think it's also possible that > > people > > > > > >> > > > > can get confluence accounts (see > > > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7058), > > > > > >> > > > > so if a non-committer wanted to participate they could. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 2:53 PM Christopher > > > > > >> > > > > <ctubb...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 1:34 PM Dave Marion > > > > > >> > > > > > <dmario...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I'm opposed to using the website for the reasons I > > > > > >> > > > > > > specified > > > > > >> > > > earlier, so > > > > > >> > > > > > it > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Your reasons that I saw were: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 1. I don't think internal design discussions should > go > > > on > > > > > >> > > > > > > the > > > > > >> > project > > > > > >> > > > > > website. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > That doesn't look to me like a reason. That appears to > > > just > > > > > >> > > > > > be > > > > > >> > stating > > > > > >> > > > > > the conclusion. Did I miss your reason here? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2. Changes to the design documents could not be seen > > by > > > > > >> > > > > > > others > > > > > >> > right > > > > > >> > > > > > away (IIRC changes to the website are built and > > available > > > > > >> > > > > > at https://accumulo.staged.apache.org/, but human > > > > > >> > > > > > intervention is > > > > > >> > > > required > > > > > >> > > > > > to publish it at https://accumulo.apache.org/). > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > What do you mean by "others" here? Do you mean > "users", > > as > > > > > >> > > > > > opposed > > > > > >> > to > > > > > >> > > > > > "developers/contributors"? The ASF draws a distinction > > > > > >> > > > > > between "developers/contributors" and "users" as it > > > > > >> > > > > > pertains to official releases. Releases are intended > to > > be > > > > > >> > > > > > consumed by users, and pre-release stuff is intended > to > > be > > > > > >> > > > > > collaborative, open to all potential > > > > > >> > > > > > developers/contributors. Very very rarely are things > > > > > >> > > > > > reserved exclusively for committers. We don't even > have > > a > > > > > >> > > > > > private committers space (the private mailing list is > > > > > >> > > > > > PMC-private, not committer-private). Having a > > distinction > > > > > >> > > > > > between users and > > > > > >> > developers > > > > > >> > > > > > doesn't mean we can't publish things on the website... > > it > > > > > >> > > > > > just > > > > > >> > means > > > > > >> > > > > > that we should be careful about how we do it, which is > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > same > > > > > >> > care > > > > > >> > > > > > we should take regardless of where we put it. > > > Specifically, > > > > > >> > > > > > the > > > > > >> > care > > > > > >> > > > > > we need to take is to avoid marketing pre-release > > content > > > > > >> > > > > > to > > > > > >> users. > > > > > >> > > > > > One way we can exercise this care for content on our > > > > > >> > > > > > website is > > > > > >> > that > > > > > >> > > > > > we can avoid sharing these unpolished designs by > simply > > > not > > > > > >> > > > > > linking them on the site, or by placing them in an > area > > > > > >> > > > > > that is clearly > > > > > >> > marked > > > > > >> > > > > > as intended for devs. But, we have no similar > > distinction > > > > > >> > > > > > between committers and non-committer devs for which we > > > > > >> > > > > > should avoid sharing pre-release content under > > > development. > > > > > >> > > > > > In fact, it is the > > > > > >> > opposite... > > > > > >> > > > > > we should be developing openly so as to allow room for > > > > > >> > non-committers > > > > > >> > > > > > to become committers through participation in > > development > > > > > >> > activities. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > As for the staging/publication of the website, that's > > just > > > > > >> > > > > > a > > > > > >> > mechanic > > > > > >> > > > > > for verifying the website isn't broken before we serve > > it. > > > > > >> > > > > > It's > > > > > >> > not a > > > > > >> > > > > > mechanism for keeping things internal vs. shared and > > > > > >> > > > > > doesn't have anything to do with the separation > between > > > > > >> > > > > > devs and users. We > > > > > >> > already > > > > > >> > > > > > publish Draft contents to the website, as well as > > > > > >> > developer-specific > > > > > >> > > > > > documentation not intended for users. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > We've even specifically published work-in-progress > > design > > > > > >> > > > > > documents there, of the same type that seems to be the > > > > > >> > > > > > basis of this conversation ( > > > > > >> https://accumulo.apache.org/design/system-snapshot). > > > > > >> > I > > > > > >> > > > > > would strongly prefer us to continue to do it this > way, > > > > > >> > > > > > rather than create a new space, and have these kinds > of > > > > > >> > > > > > things scattered in multiple places. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > If, on the other hand, you intend to say that these > > should > > > > > >> > > > > > be > > > > > >> > private > > > > > >> > > > > > because they aren't ready for other potential > > > contributors, > > > > > >> > > > > > then I would argue that we're an openly developed > > > project... > > > > > >> > > > > > if something isn't ready to be shared with other > > potential > > > > > >> > > > > > contributors / developers, such that you want to keep > it > > > > > >> > > > > > internal to existing committers, then it's not ready > to > > be > > > > > >> > > > > > contributed to the project at all... because we don't > > > > > >> > > > > > restrict collaboration to only existing committers. > That > > > > > >> > > > > > would prevent others from participating and > > > > > >> > earning > > > > > >> > > > > > the merit to become committers, and that's not > something > > > we > > > > > >> > > > > > should > > > > > >> > be > > > > > >> > > > > > doing. Anything that is okay to share with existing > > > > > >> > > > > > committers > > > > > >> > should > > > > > >> > > > > > be okay to share to other potential contributors who > > want > > > > > >> > > > > > to participate, and should be done in a space that > > allows > > > > > >> > > > > > them to do that. The website is a perfect space for > > that, > > > > > >> > > > > > and has everything > > > > > >> > we > > > > > >> > > > > > need. I'm actually not sure about Confluence... I > > suspect > > > > > >> > > > > > non-committers wouldn't be able to participate there > > > > > >> > > > > > because they probably can't get accounts for it. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > looks like we need to > > > > > >> > > > > > > wait for INFRA to fix Confluence. I'd be curious how > > > much > > > > > >> > > > > > > we > > > > > >> > need to > > > > > >> > > > use > > > > > >> > > > > > > the mailing list during > > > > > >> > > > > > > the design phase. We can announce meeting > dates/times > > on > > > > > >> > > > > > > the > > > > > >> > mailing > > > > > >> > > > list > > > > > >> > > > > > > and post links to > > > > > >> > > > > > > meeting notes in Confluence. Ultimately, decisions > > made > > > > > >> > > > > > > by the > > > > > >> > people > > > > > >> > > > > > that > > > > > >> > > > > > > want to be involved > > > > > >> > > > > > > will turn into pull requests against the codebase > > which > > > > > >> > comitters can > > > > > >> > > > > > weigh > > > > > >> > > > > > > in on. When you say, > > > > > >> > > > > > > "... but decisions about those would still need to > be > > > > > >> > > > > > > done on the > > > > > >> > > > mailing > > > > > >> > > > > > > list." Are you saying that we need to discuss every > > > > > >> > > > > > > single design decision on the mailing > > > > > >> > list? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Yes and no. I am saying that decisions need to happen > on > > > > > >> > > > > > the > > > > > >> > mailing > > > > > >> > > > > > list, but I agree with you that this can be satisfied > > > > > >> > > > > > through pull requests. I just wanted to emphasize that > > > > > >> > > > > > regardless of where we do that pre-decision > > collaboration, > > > > > >> > > > > > that collaboration should not be misconstrued as a > > > decision > > > > > >> > > > > > to > > > > > >> accept those ideas into the project. > > > > > >> > The > > > > > >> > > > > > decision occurs during the PR or other activity that > > > > > >> > > > > > interfaces > > > > > >> > with > > > > > >> > > > > > the mailing list, subsequent to the collaboration in > the > > > > > >> > design/idea > > > > > >> > > > > > phase. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > As for the pre-decision collaboration space we're > > > > > >> > > > > > discussing, I > > > > > >> > just > > > > > >> > > > > > want to be careful that we're not creating such a > space > > in > > > > > >> > > > > > an exclusionary way that allows only existing > committers > > > to > > > > > >> > participate, > > > > > >> > > > > > that excludes other potential contributors. This is > > still > > > > > >> > > > > > an openly-developed project, and we should collaborate > > in > > > a > > > > > >> > > > > > space > > > > > >> > that is > > > > > >> > > > > > not exclusive to existing committers, but open to > > > > > >> > > > > > non-committer contributors and potential contributors > as > > > > well. > > > > > >> > > > > > So, while we may > > > > > >> > want > > > > > >> > > > > > to keep a line separating dev activity from user > > > > > >> > > > > > consumption (an important separation that relates to > > > > > >> > > > > > official ASF releases), we > > > > > >> > should > > > > > >> > > > > > not be drawing a line between committer-devs as > > "internal" > > > > > >> > > > > > and contributor-devs as "external". The website, with > > its > > > > > >> > > > > > own issue tracker, the ability to render markdown, do > > > > > >> > > > > > reviews, and collaboratively edit, seems like the > ideal > > > > > >> > > > > > place to me. We've used > > > > > >> > it > > > > > >> > > > > > before for the same purpose, and I think we should > > > continue > > > > > >> > > > > > to do > > > > > >> > so. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 12:56 PM Christopher > > > > > >> > > > > > > <ctubb...@apache.org > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > So, I agree a space would be helpful. Although > it's > > > old > > > > > >> > > > > > > > school > > > > > >> > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > inconvenient, the mailing list is the canonical > > place > > > > > >> > > > > > > > for > > > > > >> > > > discussion. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We currently use GitHub issues a lot, but that's > > > copied > > > > > >> > > > > > > > to a > > > > > >> > > > mailing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > list (as is our old JIRA space), so if people want > > to > > > > > >> > participate > > > > > >> > > > > > > > without a GitHub account, they can still do that. > > > There > > > > > >> > > > > > > > are > > > > > >> > certain > > > > > >> > > > > > > > options that are perhaps less convenient, such as > > just > > > > > >> > > > > > > > using > > > > > >> > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > mailing list and our dev SVN space, but still more > > > > > >> > > > > > > > appropriate > > > > > >> > than > > > > > >> > > > > > > > options that would be less ubiquitous for > potential > > > > > >> > participants. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I think the ASF Confluence is probably fine, for > > > > > >> > > > > > > > storing, > > > > > >> > editing, > > > > > >> > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > collaborating on shared documents, but decisions > > about > > > > > >> > > > > > > > those > > > > > >> > would > > > > > >> > > > > > > > still need to be done on the mailing list. If I > > > > > >> > > > > > > > remember > > > > > >> > > > correctly, we > > > > > >> > > > > > > > used to have a Wiki space, prior to it being > > > > > >> > > > > > > > transferred to Confluence, but it was poorly > > > > > >> > > > > > > > maintained, so we abandoned it in > > > > > >> > > > favor > > > > > >> > > > > > > > of using the website for docs. I could be > > > > > >> > > > > > > > mis-remembering, but > > > > > >> > I > > > > > >> > > > think > > > > > >> > > > > > > > this is the case. It might explain why you can't > > > create > > > > > >> > > > > > > > a > > > > > >> > > > Confluence > > > > > >> > > > > > > > space. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > My preference would be to just use the website. I > > > think > > > > > >> > > > > > > > it's > > > > > >> > fine > > > > > >> > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > have a dev / design area of the website, and we > can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > discuss on > > > > > >> > > > GitHub > > > > > >> > > > > > > > issues for the accumulo-website repo. That is a > bit > > > > > >> > > > > > > > less > > > > > >> > convenient > > > > > >> > > > > > > > than Confluence if it's used heavily, but it's > more > > > > > >> > > > > > > > convenient > > > > > >> > in > > > > > >> > > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > sense that it's more accessible and fits more in > > line > > > > > >> > > > > > > > with our > > > > > >> > > > current > > > > > >> > > > > > > > mode of operation. Plus, when a document is final, > > > it's > > > > > >> > > > > > > > easy to > > > > > >> > > > link > > > > > >> > > > > > > > to from our documentation, without making users > jump > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > another service to view docs. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I would be opposed to using GitHub wiki or a new > git > > > > repo. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We > > > > > >> > have > > > > > >> > > > > > > > enough repos. Although it seems like they are > free, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > there is > > > > > >> > still > > > > > >> > > > a > > > > > >> > > > > > > > lot of boilerplate work to maintain them, from > > > managing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > .github/workflows, .github/CONTRIBUTING.md, etc., > to > > > > > >> > .asf.yaml, to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > README, to keeping copyright dates updated in the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > NOTICE file, > > > > > >> > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > more. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > In summary, my preference: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 1. Keep a space in accumulo-website, discuss on GH > > > > > >> > > > > > > > issues and > > > > > >> > > > mailing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > list (strongly preferred) 2. Confluence, discuss > on > > > > > >> > > > > > > > mailing list (prefer over other > > > > > >> > options, > > > > > >> > > > but > > > > > >> > > > > > > > not a fan) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 3. GitHub wiki, discuss on mailing list (strongly > > > > > >> > > > > > > > prefer not > > > > > >> > to use > > > > > >> > > > > > this > > > > > >> > > > > > > > option) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 4. New GitHub repo, discuss on GH issues and > mailing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > list > > > > > >> > (strongly > > > > > >> > > > > > > > prefer not to use this option) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 12:30 PM Ed Coleman < > > > > > >> > edcole...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Currently, asf cannot create new wiki's because > > of a > > > > > >> > Confluence > > > > > >> > > > > > issue ( > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-24291 > ) > > I > > > > > >> > > > > > > > chatted > > > > > >> > with > > > > > >> > > > > > infra > > > > > >> > > > > > > > and in response they created that issue. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > To expand on this discussion, I would like to > toss > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > out > > > > > >> > another > > > > > >> > > > > > > > alternative to discuss / explore. What if we > used a > > > > > >> > > > > > > > separate > > > > > >> > > > GitHub > > > > > >> > > > > > > > project, something like Accumulo-Design, just > like > > > > > >> > accumulo-proxy > > > > > >> > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > accumulo-examples. As a separate project, it > would > > be > > > > > >> > available > > > > > >> > > > for > > > > > >> > > > > > > > collaboration for the community, but remain > separate > > > > > >> > > > > > > > from main > > > > > >> > > > project > > > > > >> > > > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the website to keep current code / documentation / > > > > > >> > > > > > > > design > > > > > >> > clearly > > > > > >> > > > > > separate > > > > > >> > > > > > > > from speculative design discussions. As a > project: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > - document history would be preserved with git > > > commit > > > > > >> > history. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > - document collaboration could be done with > normal > > > PR > > > > > >> > > > submissions / > > > > > >> > > > > > > > reviews. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > - issues could be used to discuss design > aspects, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > capturing > > > > > >> > the > > > > > >> > > > > > comment > > > > > >> > > > > > > > history. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > The biggest downside is that it would be yet > > another > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > project > > > > > >> > to > > > > > >> > > > > > follow / > > > > > >> > > > > > > > track. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > For me, I think the issue is that we need a > > public, > > > > > >> > collaborative > > > > > >> > > > > > space > > > > > >> > > > > > > > to hold design discussions. Neither the main > project > > > or > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > > web-site > > > > > >> > > > > > seem > > > > > >> > > > > > > > quite appropriate and Confluence seems to lack the > > > > > >> > collaboration > > > > > >> > > > that > > > > > >> > > > > > can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > be achieved with github. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > We need a space to capture the redesign and > > whatever > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > we > > > > > >> > select > > > > > >> > > > can be > > > > > >> > > > > > > > made to work - I'm just wondering what provides > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > easiest > > > > > >> > forum > > > > > >> > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > build > > > > > >> > > > > > > > a collaborative space for the Accumulo community. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Ed Coleman > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On 2023/02/28 16:35:31 dlmar...@comcast.net > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Circling back on this issue - I agree that > > > comments > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > >> > such > > > > > >> > > > make > > > > > >> > > > > > > > sense for internal design documents. I'm going to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > create an > > > > > >> > INFRA > > > > > >> > > > > > ticket > > > > > >> > > > > > > > for a cwiki space for Accumulo unless there are > any > > > > > >> objections. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > From: Drew Farris <d...@ill.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 5:16 PM > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@accumulo.apache.org > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Enable Github wiki in > > > > asf.yaml? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > As mentioned, wikis can provide a streamlined > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > collaborative > > > > > >> > > > editing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > workflow that's less labor intensive than > updating a > > > > > >> website. > > > > > >> > They > > > > > >> > > > can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > promote collaboration by providing specific > tooling > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > support > > > > > >> > > > > > comments, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > revisions and iteration. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > In terms of preservation, GH wikis act just > like > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > any other > > > > > >> > Git > > > > > >> > > > > > > > repository, with a remote at (for example) > > > > g...@github.com > > > > > : > > > > > >> > > > > > > > apache/accumulo.wiki.git > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > IIRC the pages are just GH flavored markdown. > > > There > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > are at > > > > > >> > > > least a > > > > > >> > > > > > few > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Apache projects using them. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > However, GH wikis lack some features that I > feel > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > >> > important > > > > > >> > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > support collaborative authoring. For example, the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ability to > > > > > >> > > > comment > > > > > >> > > > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > discuss specific passages in a document is a > feature > > > > > >> > > > > > > > that's > > > > > >> > > > present in > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Cwiki, but not in GH wikis. I've come appreciate > > this > > > > > >> > > > > > > > this in > > > > > >> > my > > > > > >> > > > google > > > > > >> > > > > > > > docs and office workflows, so expect that it would > > be > > > > > >> > > > > > > > useful > > > > > >> > for > > > > > >> > > > > > Accumulo > > > > > >> > > > > > > > design discussions too. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 2:54 PM Keith Turner < > > > > > >> > > > ktur...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I would like to try a wiki for design > > documents, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I think > > > > > >> > it > > > > > >> > > > > > would be > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > less cumbersome than the website and we can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > always link > > > > > >> > from > > > > > >> > > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > website and issues to the wiki. I think its > > ok > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > to give > > > > > >> > it a > > > > > >> > > > try > > > > > >> > > > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > abandon it in the future, if abandoned would > > > just > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > need to > > > > > >> > > > > > properly > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > communicate that. The content should be > > > archived > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > >> > Apache > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > infrastructure, so if GH wiki does not do > that > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > then we > > > > > >> > should > > > > > >> > > > > > not use > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > it. If GH wiki is not an option then could > > try > > > > > cwiki. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 7:55 AM > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > <dlmar...@comcast.net> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I reverted the change. I didn't think it > > would > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > be a big > > > > > >> > > > deal, > > > > > >> > > > > > but > > > > > >> > > > > > > > if > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > requires discussion, then let's discuss it. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm looking for a place to host > information > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > related to > > > > > >> > > > internal > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > design > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > discussions. I envision these to be living > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > documents that > > > > > >> > > > will be > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > updated over time as the > design/implementation > > > > > >> > progresses and > > > > > >> > > > > > that > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > other committers will be able to comment on > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > edit. I > > > > > >> > don't > > > > > >> > > > > > feel > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > that the website is the correct place for > this > > > > > >> because: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I don't think internal design > > discussions > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > >> > go > > > > > >> > > > on the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > website. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Changes to the design documents could > > not > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > be seen > > > > > >> > by > > > > > >> > > > > > others > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > right > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > away (IIRC changes to the website are built > > and > > > > > >> > available at > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://accumulo.staged.apache.org/, but > > human > > > > > >> > intervention > > > > > >> > > > is > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > required to publish it at > > > > > >> https://accumulo.apache.org/). > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I looked in the INFRA issues and other > > > projects > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > >> > using > > > > > >> > > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > GH > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Wiki > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > feature and I saw no mention of backing it > up > > or > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > > requirement > > > > > >> > > > > > to > > > > > >> > > > > > > > do > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > so (maybe they rely on GitHub backing it > up?). > > > It > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > does > > > > > >> > appear > > > > > >> > > > > > that we > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > would need an INFRA ticket so that they can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > modify the > > > > > >> > GitHub > > > > > >> > > > > > project > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > settings to lock the GitHub wiki down so > that > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > >> > > > committers can > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > modify it. If GitHub Wiki is not acceptable, > > > then > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I think > > > > > >> > > > Apache > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Confluence ( > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org) might be an > > > acceptable > > > > > >> > > > alternative. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > From: Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2023 4:41 AM > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > To: accumulo-dev <dev@accumulo.apache.org > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: comm...@accumulo.apache.org > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [accumulo] branch main > updated: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Enable > > > > > >> > Github > > > > > >> > > > > > wiki in > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > asf.yaml > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I don't recall a discussion about this > > change, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > but I > > > > > >> > think > > > > > >> > > > it > > > > > >> > > > > > goes > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > against previous efforts to make the website > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > >> > > > canonical > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > location for our documentation. I don't even > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > think infra > > > > > >> > is > > > > > >> > > > > > backing > > > > > >> > > > > > > > up > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > wiki repos, so there wouldn't even be a > record > > > of > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > >> > wiki > > > > > >> > > > > > contents > > > > > >> > > > > > > > in > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > ASF spaces (vs. the main repo, which is > backed > > > up > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > >> > GitBox > > > > > >> > > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > issue tracker, which CCs the notifications > > > list). > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > In short, I think this should be reverted > > and > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > >> > should not > > > > > >> > > > > > use the > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > GitHub wiki. If we need to store documents > in > > a > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > >> > > > > > controlled > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > way, we can store them on the website, or in > > our > > > > > >> > project's > > > > > >> > > > SVN > > > > > >> > > > > > dev > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > space. The wiki is just another place people > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > would have > > > > > >> > to > > > > > >> > > > > > follow if > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > they want to participate, and I don't think > > that > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > serves > > > > > >> > us. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Therefore, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I think we shouldn't use it. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 15:59 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > <dlmar...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > This is an automated email from the ASF > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > dual-hosted > > > > > >> > git > > > > > >> > > > > > > > repository. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > dlmarion pushed a commit to branch main > in > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > repository > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/accumulo. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > git > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > The following commit(s) were added to > > > > > >> > refs/heads/main by > > > > > >> > > > this > > > > > >> > > > > > > > push: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > new ae8a817e7b Enable Github wiki > in > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > asf.yaml > > > > > >> > > > > > ae8a817e7b is > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > described below > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > commit > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ae8a817e7b2af8c64096ed1a4274eaef44c0e677 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Author: Dave Marion < > dlmar...@apache.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > AuthorDate: Fri Feb 24 15:59:10 2023 > -0500 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > .asf.yaml | 2 +- > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > deletion(-) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/.asf.yaml b/.asf.yaml index > > > > > >> > > > > > bc2c943e82..08aa357082 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > 100644 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/.asf.yaml > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/.asf.yaml > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ github: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > - big-data > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > - hacktoberfest > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > features: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > - wiki: false > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > + wiki: true > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > issues: true > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > projects: true > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
